Purdue Pharma is already defending lawsuits from several states and local governments, but Massachusetts is the first state to personally name the company’s executives in a complaint, Attorney General Maura Healey said.

Rainey obtained opioid painkillers prescribed to an elderly person, then arranged for the sale of the pills to dealers who distributed them to opioid addicts, Brady said.

According to prosecutors, Rainey had been part of a criminal network of drug dealers distributing the drugs in the Pittsburgh region.

In December 2016, the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration charged Rainey and 17 others in connection to the broader health care fraud and prescription pill distribution scheme.

Seventeen of the 18 suspects hailed from places in Western Pennsylvania, including Gibsonia, North Versailles, Wilkinsburg, Ford City (Armstrong County) and Pittsburgh's East Liberty, Terrace Village, Marshall-Shadeland, Bedford Dwellings and Manchester neighborhoods. One man, Kavon Dawkins, was from Clinton, Mich.

Indictments alleged that the suspects obtained prescription painkillers paid for by government-funded health care programs and then sold the pills for cash.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Brendan T. Conway is prosecuted the cases with help from the DEA, the FBI's Federal Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, the state Attorney General and Pittsburgh and Allegheny County police.

Natasha Lindstrom is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 412-380-8514, nlindstrom@tribweb.com or via Twitter @NewsNatasha.

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our
Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent
via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.